J-10 Thread III (Closed to posting)
- Thread starter crobato
- Start date
- Status
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
Multiple shots and I think Deino in another forum is the only one to post a pic that possibly been used to photoshop. I have to say it's more convincing with all these new shots coming out and no one has been able to keep up with matching photos to show a fake except for one which IMO is at angle and position that could've been easily taken by photographers many many times before.
I'm quite more interested on this picture. It may be a second prototype.
Why the inlet discoloration? I said, its probably made of composite as this is easier to mold into complex geometries. Much easier to do this by carving a mold using CAD/CAM, then fill the mold in with resin, rather than use CNCs and presses to make metal ones. For a trial plane, there is a chance that the intake's geometries may not be completely correct due to the testing results. So you want to remove it easily and try another one with changed geometries, test and change again until you get it right. Being composite, it would require a primer with a different chemistry from the one that bonds with aluminum. That can create a change in shade.
The first plane is likely to have flight telemetry on the nose because of this, so it won't have real radar.
The fun begins with the second plane, assuming they worked out the inlet geometry issues. Once the design is fixed, you can implement it on metal and as part of the plane's section. This will make the inlet more seamless with the rest of the plane, and you can paint the same primer on it like the rest of the plane.
The second plane might also be the first plane to actually carry and test a radar. So this time, the radome might be real also, and not some metal stand in. The real thing may also have some geometry alterations learned from the experience in the first plane.
I should note that historically, the second prototypes of both the original J-10 and JF-17 were carrying radar while the first were carrying flight telemetry.
I don't think the line on the canopy is for the IFR or as a vent for an AESA. With the clearer pictures, one can see a small circle in front of that line, and that's likely the attachment base for the IFR probe. The line is covered and metallic, seems to me its not a vent.
Note that the tear dropped shaped RWR seen in previous J-10s is not seen here. Instead, this line occupies the same space as the RWR. Me thinks its a new RWR. Also note there is a similar but smaller line that now appears more visible in the clearer pictures, although you can still make this out in the older fuzzier pictures. These lines should make up the rear size of the RWR system.
I notice the bulge on the tail is no longer there on the second aircraft. Did the MAWS get deleted?
Note that the tear dropped shaped RWR seen in previous J-10s is not seen here. Instead, this line occupies the same space as the RWR. Me thinks its a new RWR. Also note there is a similar but smaller line that now appears more visible in the clearer pictures, although you can still make this out in the older fuzzier pictures. These lines should make up the rear size of the RWR system.
I notice the bulge on the tail is no longer there on the second aircraft. Did the MAWS get deleted?
The DSI would have subtracted weight by removing the mechanical components of the variable inlet.
That would cause a greater CG shift to the rear, potentially that would increase the plane's instability.
One of the ways that would be countered is to increase the fin area for the rudder and ventral fins.
Which is exactly what is done on the plane.
Who told you that? DSI is perfect for supersonic flight. The "S" in DSI stands for Supersonic. The intention of the bump is to force out the boundary layer out of the way at higher speeds.
If you like an intake that is optimized for lower speeds, a smaller but open one would suffice, like those on the JH-7A or the Jaguar.
If you like an intake that is optimized for lower speeds, a smaller but open one would suffice, like those on the JH-7A or the Jaguar.
tphuang, do you have any sources that talk about a chinese AESA?
I personally don't know much about radars, but I know an AESA radar is definetly pretty hard to make..
- Status